Rich Burridge wrote:
Brock Pytlik wrote:
Okay, I've added those in.
New webrev at:
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~richb/pkg-4395-8829-v5/
Note that I couldn't do something like:
self.assert_(res.description == "DESCRIPTION: Example Package 6")
in the "example_pkg6" section, because "description" isn't a
valid field in the PackageInfo class in
.../gate/src/modules/client/api.py
(around lines 1685-1716).
Should this be changed?
Thanks.
Hmm. I think it depends on whether we're totally deprecating the
description field, or if the summary and description fields are both
going to remain, but should be different things. If we're totally
deprecating, then it's fine for PackageInfo not to have a description
entry. If we want both around, but with different values, then
PackageInfo should expose that.
From a sample size of one (but a good sample since it was Danek), it
sounds like we're going to want to have both in a package. The
description will be storing the long description of the package. So,
PackageInfo should probably present both to the world.
Okay. So should that be a separate bug or should I add it in as part
of this one?
Thanks.
Also, the changes LGTM.
Brock
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
